Paper detail

Off-fault damage characterisation during and after experimental quasi-static and dynamic rupture in crustal rock from laboratory P-wave tomography and microstructures

Elastic strain energy released during shear failure in rock is partially spent as fracture energy $Γ$ to propagate the rupture further. $Γ$ is dissipated within the rupture tip process zone, and includes energy dissipated as off-fault damage, $Γ_\mathrm{off}$. Quantifying off-fault damage formed during rupture is crucial to understand its effect on rupture dynamics and slip-weakening processes behind the rupture tip, and its contribution to seismic radiation. Here, we quantify $Γ_\mathrm{off}$ and associated change in off-fault mechanical properties during and after quasi-static and dynamic rupture. We do so by performing dynamic and quasi-static shear failure experiments on intact Lanhélin granite under triaxial conditions. We quantify the change in elastic moduli around the fault from time-resolved 3D $P$-wave velocity tomography obtained during and after failure. We measure the off-fault microfracture damage after failure. From the tomography, we observe a localised maximum 25\% drop in $P$-wave velocity around the shear failure interface for both quasi-static and dynamic failure. Microfracture density data reveals a damage zone width of around 10 mm after quasi-static failure, and 20 mm after dynamic failure. Microfracture densities obtained from $P$-wave velocity tomography models using an effective medium approach are in good agreement with the measured off-fault microfracture damage. $Γ_\mathrm{off}$ obtained from off-fault microfracture measurements is around 3 kJm$^{2}$ for quasi-static rupture, and 5.5 kJm$^{2}$ for dynamic rupture. We argue that rupture velocity determines damage zone width for slip up to a few mm, and that shear fracture energy $Γ$ increases with increasing rupture velocity.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.